COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
MAYBANK ISLAMIC BERHAD – Appellant
Versus
WWE HOLDINGS BHD – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. garnishee proceedings require an agreed acknowledgment of debt. (Para 1 , 6) |
| 2. existence and acknowledgment of debts are essential in garnishee actions. (Para 2 , 16) |
| 3. enforcement of a judgment debt through garnishee proceedings. (Para 4) |
| 4. pending disputes do not negate established debts in garnishee cases. (Para 5 , 25) |
| 5. principles governing what constitutes a debt for garnishment. (Para 7 , 9 , 11) |
| 6. the definition and application of debts under garnishee proceedings. (Para 12 , 14) |
| 7. recognition that counterclaims do not impede the garnishment of acknowledged debts. (Para 20 , 23) |
[1] This appeal relates to the enforcement of a judgment debt of the sum of RM12,117,646.88 which is due and owing from the judgment debtor, Ibsul Holdings Sdn Bhd ["JD"] to the appellant. The appellant sought to enforce the judgment debt through garnishee proceedings under O 49 of the Rules of 2012. The learned Judge allowed the respondent's appeal against the order of the learned SAR who had granted a garnishee order absolute on 11 January 2016. Upon proper consideration, we unanimously allowed the appeal, set aside the decision of the High Court and reinstated the decision of th
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.